APPCOR11209

• Permit No: C1982056
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 2/17/1983
• Doc Name: CYCCS RESPONSE TO ADEQUACY REVIEW FOIDEL CREEK MINE
• From: MLRD
• To: SANDY EMRICH & ED BISCHOFF
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

t
R¢naitl D Lamm
(i GV2~OG~
DEPARTt~T OF NATURAL RESOURCES • 'lI IlI'IIIII"IIIII
D 1d U nlc Paec Ge E.cc ulim fh rector 999
MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION
DAVID C. SHELTON Director
TU: Sandy Emrich and Ed Bischoff --~°"
FRUM: Jerry Zimpfer
RE: CYCC's kesponse to Ndequacy Review, Foidel Creek Mine
UATE: February 17, 1983
I have completed my review of Colorado Yampa Coal Company's (CYCCj
January 31, 1983 response to our December Adequacy review. The applicant
has provided sufficient information to resolve many of the ite~ris
identified duriny our review. However, the applicant's discussion of
probable hydrologic consequences is still not adequate, and additional
information and analysis must be provided by the applicant. My review
comments, provided below, are arranged according to the format of our
December adequacy letter.
V. Hydrology Description - Surface Water Information
1) The applicant has not demonstrated that the spring survey based
upon published USGN data is, by itself, adequate fur this
particular operation. However, the applicant states that CYCC
personnel have conducted their own spriny survey in conjunction
with other Hydrologic studies, and that the two springs
identified by the USGS are "the only natural springs Found in
the permit area which adjoin the proposed Foidel Creek Mine
operation". In addition, the applicant has expanded his
proposed hydroloyic monitoring program to include periodic
rnonitoriny of the springs for quantity and quality. Given the
low probability of the proposed mining operation affecting these
springs, the applicant's response is satisfactory.
2) The applicant has requested that the Division proceed with its
review of the section on Alternative Water Supply Information.
Unfortunately that is not possible at this time. Several items
in the applicant's discussion of Probable Hydrologic
Consequences remain inadequate, and, as a result, the full
extent of possible Hydrologic effects has not been defined.
Until those hydroloyic effects are better understood, the
Division cannot determine which effects might require mitigation
in terms of alternative water supply.
3) The applicant has provided the infonnatiort requested concerning
irrigation ditches along Fish Creek and Foidel Creek.
423 Centennral BmldinD. 7313 Sherman Sirect Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel [phone]